KGCOE MSD Technical Review Agenda
P11003: Dynamic Keyboard Phase III
Meeting Topics:
1.) Project goals and current phase state, Project Plan
2.) Customer needs
3.) Engineering specifications
4.) Functional Decomposition: enriched text
5.) Concept development and pre-selection
6.) Proposed System Architecture
7.) Risk Assessment
8.) Open Q&A session, suggestions and critiques.
Meeting Date: January 19, 2011
Meeting Location: 09-4435
Meeting time: 4 pm – 5:30 pm
Timeline:
Meeting Timeline /Start time / Topic of Review / Required Attendees /
4:00p / Project Introduction & Summary / All Invitees
4:05p / Project Breakdown/Project Plan / All Invitees
4:15p / Customer Needs / All Invitees
4:25p / Engineering Specifications / All Invitees
4:35p / Functional Decomposition / All Invitees
4:40p / Concept Development / All Invitees
4:45p / System Architecture / All Invitees
4:55p / Risk Assessment / All Invitees
5:00p / Question and Answer, Suggestions & Critiques / Interested Parties
Project # / Project Name / Project Track / Project Family
11003 / Dynamic Keyboard III / Assistive Devices
Start Term / Team Guide / Project Sponsor / Doc. Revision
2010-2 / Prof. Slack / Dr. DeBartolo
KGCOE MSD Page 4 of 8 Technical Review Agenda
KGCOE MSD Technical Review Agenda
Project Description
Project Background:
When speaking and signing, thought and expression are combined to add clarity and expression. Text entry, however, lacks much of the expressive power of speaking and signing. NTID students support the idea of adding “imposed expression” to the keyboard. From a technology perspective this has little if any impact to the design requirements. Regardless of the end application, the hardware developed in this project will add another dimension of user input to a PC.
Problem Statement:
The primary objective of this senior design team is to improve both the functionality, reliability, and aesthetics of the existing dynamic keyboard developed in phase 2. The dynamic board will capture information about the key being struck as well as force applied to that key, which will feed that information to the PC using a USB.
Objectives/Scope:
1. The end product should be physically similar in size, shape and weight of a standard keyboard.
2. The keyboard must be capable of returning character input in conjunction with stroke pressure and time of contact (paired information).
Deliverables:
· Functional keyboard that meets project needs
· Thorough testing by team and end-users. Gather end-user feedback for future keyboard project needs.
· New design, drawing, and sketches
· Relevant test data proving functionality of end product
Expected Project Benefits:
· Keyboard will benefit the deaf community
· Keyboard will serve as a basis for future computer science related senior design projects
Core Team Members:
· Andrew Hobson – Project Manager (ME)
· Evan Gelfand (ME)
· Andrew Vitkus (EE)
Strategy & Approach
Assumptions & Constraints:
It is assumed that the current design is both functional and able to interface with a standard (Windows OS) PC. After understanding current design and operations, students will make significant design modifications to the current phase II keyboard relevant to housing and integrated electronic components. Proposed budget: $300 or at the recommendation of the team and sponsor.
Issues & Risks:
· Full range of components will not fit in a standard keyboard shell
· Lead time for printed circuit board may be longer than expected
· Must consider cost when designing keyboard
KGCOE MSD Page 4 of 8 Technical Review Agenda
KGCOE MSD Technical Review Agenda
KGCOE MSD Page 4 of 8 Technical Review Agenda
KGCOE MSD Technical Review Agenda
Dynamic Keyboard Phase III: 11 Week Project Plan
Customer Need # / Importance / Description / Comments/StatusCN1 / 9 / Ability to portray expression through learned ability / Enhanced via electrical sensors within the keyboard
CN2 / 9 / Integration to PC through standard connections / PS/2 or USB
CN3 / 9 / Ability to differentiate individual key strike events, and associate them to corresponding sensor events in time. / Maintain the integrity of the sensor work done by previous group when applied to complete keyboard.
CN4 / 9 / Simple keyboard functionality / Keyboard functions as a regular keyboard without any special software or installation (mechanical threshold)
CN5 / 9 / Must be reliable / Thorough testing with user feedback
CN6 / 9 / Establish a high level of device precision / Low error margin
CN7 / 9 / Design or consider other keyboard configurations for future teams / Need to meet with ID students, NTID students, and faculty
CN8 / 3 / Minimize size to a standard keyboard size
CN9 / 3 / Minimized end user cost. / Reduce complexity & parts/manufacturing costs
CN10 / 3 / Device durability / Through normal use (part integrity)
CN11 / 3 / Device durability II / Critical failure (spilled drinks, being dropped etc.)
CN12 / 3 / Portability / Weight is not in excessive range with added parts
CN13 / 3 / Low maintenance / Monthly maintenance or less on average
CN14 / 3 / Ease of maintenance / Easy to fix for common problems & normal wear
CN15 / 3 / Within budget constraints / Goal is less than $1000
CN16 / 3 / Keyboard contains number pad / Separate number pad similar to standard keyboards
CN17 / 3 / Linear tactile feedback
CN18 / 1 / Ergonomics / Comfortable use
CN19 / 1 / Aesthetics / Modern/Contemporary look & materials
CN20 / 1 / Sensors in number pad
CN21 / 1 / Expanded functionality / Sensors in keys that can easily be given extended functionality to provide a more dynamic interface outside of the emotional context.
CN22 / 1 / Single cable keyboard connection
Dynamic Keyboard Phase III: Customer Needs
KGCOE MSD Page 4 of 8 Technical Review Agenda
KGCOE MSD Technical Review Agenda
Engr. Spec. # / Importance / Source / Specification (description) / Unit of Measure / Marginal Value / Ideal Value / Comments/StatusES1 / 9 / CN18 CN17 / Keystroke has Tactile Feel / Boolean / No / Yes / Maintain natural keyboard feel
ES2 / 9 / CN5 CN10 / Individual keys will be able to withstand at least 10N of force (2.25lbs) / Max force (N) / 6 / 10
ES3 / 9 / CN9 CN15 / Total component costs / Dollars ($) / 1000 / 300 / Based on phase II progress
ES4 / 1 / CN12 / Keyboard Weight / Weight (lb.) / 5 / 2
ES5 / 3 / CN22 / Keyboard Cables Required / Cable Quantity / 2 / 1
ES6 / 9 / CN6 / Force Response Range / Force (N) / 0-3 / 0-10 / Respond to 0N to 10N of force (0 to 2.25lb)
ES7 / 3 / CN2 / Powered via USB / Voltage (V) Current (mA) / 5.00V 500mA / 5.00V 200mA
ES8 / 3 / CN6 / Resolution of Output / bits / 3 / 5
ES9 / 9 / CN6 / Precision of force sensor / %error / 0.1 / ±5% / Sensor repeatability
ES10 / 1 / CN3 / Minimum duration detection / ms / 30 / 5 / At 120 WPM
ES11 / 1 / CN3 / Minimum frequency detection / Hz / 5 / 10 / Less than 10ms assumes simultaneous key strikes
ES12 / 1 / CN12 / Overall Keyboard thickness / cm / 7.5 / 4
ES13 / 1 / CN12 / Minimum Cable Length / m / 1 / 1.5
ES14 / 1 / CN11 / Water Resistant / - / - / - / Resists Moisture
ES15 / 3 / CN5 CN10 CN13 / Keyboard Durability / Years / 1 / 3 / Average use
ES16 / 1 / CN6 / Signal to Noise / Ratio / 10:1 / 100:1
ES17 / 9 / CN2 / Keyboard drivers / - / New / Original
ES18 / 3 / CN8 CN19 / Keyboard Width / Cm / 56 / 46
ES19 / 3 / CN8 CN19 / Keyboard Length / CM / 27 / 17.8
ES20 / 9 / CN7 CN2
CN4 / Type of PC Interface / Type / Other / USB
ES21 / 9 / CN1 / Paired Character Data / Boolean / No / Yes
ES22 / 1 / CN14 / Reversible Construction / Boolean / No / Yes
ES23 / 1 / CN20
CN 21 CN16 / Number of keys / # / 88 / 105
Dynamic Keyboard Phase III: Engineering Specs
KGCOE MSD Page 8 of 8 Technical Review Agenda
KGCOE MSD Technical Review Agenda
Functional Decomposition: Enriched Text Communication
KGCOE MSD Page 8 of 8 Technical Review Agenda
KGCOE MSD Technical Review Agenda
Dynamic Keyboard Phase III: Proposed Concepts
Dynamic Keyboard Phase III: Concept Selection (Pugh Diagram)
Criteria / Relative Weight / Existing Layout / Thicker Keyboard / Additional CasingMinimum Possible Size / 0.1 / -1 / 0 / 1
Minimal Cost / 0.25 / 0 / 0 / 0
Durable / 0.25 / -2 / 0 / -1
Portable / 0.05 / -1 / 2 / 0
Ergonomic / 0.3 / -2 / 1 / 1
Aesthetic / 0.05 / -2 / 1 / 0
Total: / 100% / -1.35 / 0.45 / 0.15
Rank: / 3 / 1 / 2
Dynamic Keyboard Phase III: Proposed System Architecture
Dynamic Keyboard Phase III: Risk Assessment
KGCOE MSD Page 8 of 8 Technical Review Agenda